Associations among productivity, production response, and stability indexes in oat varieties
- 65 Downloads
We tested three sets of oat varieties for grain yield in a series of environments and observed that generally more than 80% of the yield variation for individual varieties was due to linear regression response. Mean yields for varieties were significantly variable in all three sets, and regression response indexes were significantly variable in two of them.
Mean yields over the three sets were correlated with regression response indexes with r=0.61. Associations of mean yield with the three stability parameters (i.e., coefficient of determination, mean square for deviations from regression, and ecovalence) were low and usually not significant. The correlation of regression response indexes with coefficients of determination was 0.42, but neither of the other stability parameters was associated with the response indexes. The three stability parameters were closely correlated with one another.
Our materials were selected varieties, so evidently our results suggest what can be accomplished in breeding for combinations of mean production, production response, and productiom stability.
Index wordsAvena sativa oats yield production response stability index
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Breese, E. L., 1969. The measurement and significance of genotype-environment interaction in grasses. Heredity 24: 27–44.Google Scholar
- Eagles, H. A., P. N., Hinz & K. J., Frey, 1977. Selection of superior cultivars of oats by using regression coefficients. Crop Sci. 17: 101–105.Google Scholar
- Easton, H. S. & R. J., Clements, 1973. The interaction of wheat genotypes with a specific factor of the environment. J. Agric. Sci. 80: 43–52.Google Scholar
- Eberhart, S. A. & W. A., Russell, 1966. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci. 6: 36–40.Google Scholar
- Fatunla, T. & K. J., Frey, 1974. Stability indexes of radiated and nonradiated oat genotypes propagated in bulk populations. Crop Sci. 14: 719–724.Google Scholar
- Finlay, K. W. & G. N., Wilkinson, 1963. The analysis of adaptation in a plant-breeding programme. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 14: 742–754.Google Scholar
- Freeman, G. H. & J. M., Perkins, 1971. Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability. VIII. Relations between genotypes grown in different environments and measures of these environments. Heredity 27: 15–23.Google Scholar
- Gonzalez-Rosquel, V., 1976. Evolution of production stability and other quantitative traits in a bulk population of oat. Ph. D. dissertation, Iowa State Univ., Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
- Hardwick, R. C. & J. T., Wood, 1972. Regression methods of studying genotype-environment interactions. Heredity 28: 209–22.Google Scholar
- Langer, I., K. J. Frey & T. B. Bailey, 1978. Production response and stability characteristics of oat cultivars developed in different eras. Crop Sci. 18: in press.Google Scholar
- Luthra, O. P. & R. K., Singh, 1974. A comparison of different stability models in wheat. Theo. Appl. Genet. 45: 143–149.Google Scholar
- Oka, H. I., 1975. Breeding for wide adaptability. In: T. Matsuo (Ed.), Adaptability in plants. pp. 177–185. Univ. Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
- Perkins, J. M. & J. L., Jinks, 1968a. Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability. III. Multiple lines and crosses. Heredity 23: 339–356.Google Scholar
- Perkins, J. M. & J. L., Jinks, 1968b. Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability. IV. Nonlinear interactions for multiple inbred lines. Heredity 23: 525–535.Google Scholar
- Pinthus, M. J., 1973. Estimate of genotypic value: a proposed method. Euphytica 22: 121–123.Google Scholar
- Wricke, G., 1962. Uber eine Methode für Erfassung der ökologischen Streubreite in Feldversuchen. Z. Pflanzenzücht. 47: 92–96.Google Scholar
- Yates, F. & W. G., Cochran, 1938. The analysis of groups of experiments. J. Agric. Sci. 28: 556–580.Google Scholar